nickelodeonfandomcom-20200223-history
User talk:Jack's Posse Fic
Boog and Elliot's Big Adventure Hi Jack's Posse Fic. "Boog and Elliot's Big Adventure" seems to be an upcoming series, see IMDb. We maybe shouldn't delete this one. What do you think? --Weas-El ✉ 14:45, August 19, 2011 (UTC) There's no evidence it belongs to Nickelodeon, and no cast list is mentioned. IMDb is user-editable, so it's not a very good source. I follow when new shows are announced, and an Open Season spinoff series as NEVER mentioned. Please delete it--Jack's Posse Fic 14:47, August 19, 2011 (UTC) :Oh, I never noticed that it's user-editable, that's good to know. Since this affects several pages (and since I'm not well versed in Nickelodeon shows), I'll give the author a chance to provide a source. If he doesn't comply with my request, I'll delete the pages. --Weas-El ✉ 14:57, August 19, 2011 (UTC) ::Keep in mind, TheSitcomLover has yet to provide sources for anything he has made, including fake shows such as Macey & Michel--Jack's Posse Fic 15:04, August 19, 2011 (UTC) :::Alright, I'll keep that in mind. By the way, I used Google again and searched for any references. You're probably right, since I wasn't able to find a single reliable source for the information. And on most pages that I found the information was added by a user with the exact same nickname. I'll check his contributions again later. If it turns out he's spreading false information on a grand scale, we should think about taking an extra step. --Weas-El ✉ 17:26, August 19, 2011 (UTC) ::::The user was online some hours ago but didn't answer, so I deleted the pages. --Weas-El ✉ 20:37, August 21, 2011 (UTC) Bot flag Hi Jack's Posse Fic, would you check my blog and leave a comment please? I need the community's acceptance to request a bot flag. Thank you. --Weas-El ✉ 13:28, August 21, 2011 (UTC) Deletion of Sabrina articles Hey, I don't want you putting Sabrina, the Teenage Witch up for deletion because it is Nickelodeon related. It aired on TeenNick. --HINT:A AWESOME USER,that loves Chatango and Chatting but wonders,what's with Cyan? 14:05, August 22, 2011 (UTC) :IN SYNDICATION. It is not a Nickelodeon show, thus does not belong on Nickipedia--Jack's Posse Fic 14:06, August 22, 2011 (UTC) ::It also aired on the actual Nickelodeon for five years or so. I'm an admin, I get to decide what stays and what goes anyways. --HINT:A AWESOME USER,that loves Chatango and Chatting but wonders,what's with Cyan? 14:08, August 22, 2011 (UTC) :::IN SYNDICATION. It is not a Nickelodeon program no matter how you slice it. It should be deleted--Jack's Posse Fic 14:09, August 22, 2011 (UTC) ::::I don't really care what you're going to say next and I don't want to get off on the wrong hand, seeing that you've done some good for this wiki so could you let this one go? --HINT:A AWESOME USER,that loves Chatango and Chatting but wonders,what's with Cyan? 14:11, August 22, 2011 (UTC) :::::No, because just because you're an admin doesn't mean that Sabrina was a Nickelodeon original program. This wiki is not about what the Nickelodeon networks have syndicated, it's about all of the ORIGINAL PROGRAMMING--Jack's Posse Fic 14:12, August 22, 2011 (UTC) ::::::Um... no it's not dude. Nickelodeon is about it's characters, channels, programming, and Sabrina was on the programming. I don't care if you don't think it's original or not, it doesn't matter. I'm sorry but if you argue one more time I shall block you and I don't want to do that. --HINT:A AWESOME USER,that loves Chatango and Chatting but wonders,what's with Cyan? 14:16, August 22, 2011 (UTC) (reset indent) So you think blocking someone means you've won the argument. Wait until Weas-El comes. --Jack's Posse Fic 14:19, August 22, 2011 (UTC) :I'm sorry I'm ignoring your ideas but I really don't see the point of deleting Sabrina, that's all. You can do whatever you want but it's not going to be deleted by itself, you'd have to become an admin. Anyways, we're not really a community, we used to be back in the days. I remember that whenever thing finally started to get going until everyone left right now this is just a place where hardly anyone edits and there really isn't a whole big community. Weas-El is my friend anyways, I gave him adminship. --HINT:A AWESOME USER,that loves Chatango and Chatting but wonders,what's with Cyan? 14:21, August 22, 2011 (UTC) ::Just because you allowed him to be an admin doesn't mean he's you friend. Even so, friends are allowed to disagree. Ignoring my opinions just shows how childish you are. Considering all the articles I've made, I'm clearly on my way to adminship--Jack's Posse Fic 14:22, August 22, 2011 (UTC) :::Hiya. We should be able to talk things out quietly, don't you agree? It would be great if you both stopped reverting each others' edits. Edit warring is considered disruptive behavior, and I think we're above such thing. You may want to run over this advice from the help wiki. :::Now, let me make two things clear: Firstly, I will not support the one or the other opinion out of personal sympathy, but hope to find a solution we all can accept. Second, having admin rights neither means that you make the decisions alone, nor that you have the right to block users because they disagree. Instead, in a free encyclopedia usually the whole community makes the decisions by voting. The admins' jobs are enforcement of the wiki's rules, maintenance and cleanup, not leadership. Furthermore, I think every user has the right to request a page's deletion, and the message box shouldn't be removed until there's a clear agreement whether the page is to be deleted or not. :::The deletion request isn't really something that should be discussed on a user's talk page. Since we're talking about several articles, I suggest that we choose an article's talk page that represents the topic and move the discussion there. Jack's Posse Fic, please start by bringing forward some short arguments on that page why the pages should be deleted. Weblykinly, please define your position there too. By the way, I haven't really formed an opinion about this yet. --Weas-El ✉ 15:31, August 22, 2011 (UTC) Filmography Okay, I'm sorry about that but look at other wiki's take the Star War wiki for an example. It's probably the biggest wiki of all the wikis and look at Harrison Ford's page http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Harrison_Ford , it includes his filmography in there. So, I'm thinking that is it really necessary we have such short pages with not that much information? I'm also thinking your creating pages that are on the list that barely are involved with Nickelodeon. That's why I think we should try bigger projects. I'm working on project All That and next is Clarissa Explains It All. --HINT:A AWESOME USER,that loves Chatango and Chatting but wonders,what's with Cyan? 23:48, August 23, 2011 (UTC) So? We are not the Star Wars wiki. The actor pages as they are now have a lot of information. They don't need a filmography. I am making everything relevant to Nickelodeon. By putting the filmography you are the one putting information that barely are involved with Nickelodeon--Jack's Posse Fic 23:50, August 23, 2011 (UTC) Um, the Star Wars wiki is WAY better than ours. I think we should include that information same with like Early Life. What if someone came to the wiki to find stuff about Nickelodeon and they wanted to know about Amanda Bynes, the page would be filled. Plus, I worked really hard on that trying to get everything to look right. --HINT:A AWESOME USER,that loves Chatango and Chatting but wonders,what's with Cyan? 23:52, August 23, 2011 (UTC) So? We are not the Star Wars wiki. The actor pages as they are now have a lot of information. They don't need a filmography. I am making everything relevant to Nickelodeon. By putting the filmography you are the one putting information that barely are involved with Nickelodeon. The pages that you think aren't involved with Nickelodeon actually are. When we get around to the episode articles, we will need those articles for cast listings and episode-specific character listings By putting stuff like "Early life", that means we're more likely forced to plagiarize from Wikipedia. Bigger isn't always better--Jack's Posse Fic 23:50, August 23, 2011 (UTC) Filmography isn't plagiarizing though. I put my own spin on it if you saw it. I don't want to fight again and I don't want to get off on the wrong foot either. Plus, I wasn't either planning to put Early Life, I'm just very interested in Filmography.--HINT:A AWESOME USER,that loves Chatango and Chatting but wonders,what's with Cyan? 23:57, August 23, 2011 (UTC) No, I'm talking about "Early Life". we'd be forced to plagiarize. If they want to learn about the actor's early life, then they should go to Wikipedia. It has no place on Nickipedia. We're deleting articles because they're irrelevant to Nickelodeon, as we should, so it'd be hypocritical to put a filmography that is mostly non-Nick related. The introduction paragraph is enough of a summary of the rest of their careers where it just goes to show there is no reason to put a complete filmography on a Nickelodeon wiki--Jack's Posse Fic 00:04, August 24, 2011 (UTC) That's why I'm thinking we should ONLY put a filmography part after the summary because people like me want to know what the actors have been in. --HINT:A AWESOME USER,that loves Chatango and Chatting but wonders,what's with Cyan? 00:13, August 24, 2011 (UTC) They should go to Wikipedia or IMDB for that. Not Nickipedia--Jack's Posse Fic 00:14, August 24, 2011 (UTC) We're not trying to make people want to go there. Nickipedia is purposely trying to pull the Wikipedia readers to a more reliable source. --HINT:A AWESOME USER,that loves Chatango and Chatting but wonders,what's with Cyan? 00:16, August 24, 2011 (UTC) no, this site is about being reliable for Nickelodeon information, not "What Non-Nick projects was she in?". It's NICKipedia for cryin out loud NICKNICKNICKNICKNICKNICKNICKNICK-NICKELODEON!--Jack's Posse Fic 00:19, August 24, 2011 (UTC) How about only Nickelodeon Filmography. It is very relevant to the page. --HINT:A AWESOME USER,that loves Chatango and Chatting but wonders,what's with Cyan? 00:27, August 24, 2011 (UTC) Then it's redundant. Text form is better--Jack's Posse Fic 00:29, August 24, 2011 (UTC) No, I won't. It goes with the page and to be honest no one really reads paragraphs. They like to read tables. It's more eye appealing. --HINT:A AWESOME USER,that loves Chatango and Chatting but wonders,what's with Cyan? 00:38, August 24, 2011 (UTC) So nobody really reads paragraphs? Then what's the point of the encyclopedia?--Jack's Posse Fic 00:40, August 24, 2011 (UTC) You know what, do what you want. I'm getting tired of argumenting. You really want this wiki to be done your way. Then fine it can be done your way. I'm leaving this wiki as of now and unblocking Amanda Bynes. Happy now? --HINT:A AWESOME USER,that loves Chatango and Chatting but wonders,what's with Cyan? 00:41, August 24, 2011 (UTC) Well, that's drastic for two lost arguments, but alright then. You can go, after you name me successor by promoting me to admin. I can help fight off the vandals like I have been doing--Jack's Posse Fic 00:48, August 24, 2011 (UTC) Um... I don't really know what you're talking about. I haven't copied anything from Wikipedia. I used to, but I haven't since I've been back. I've looked at it to see who starred in Mighty B but that's it. I never copied and pasted in months so I don't know what you're talking about. --HINT:A AWESOME USER,that loves Chatango and Chatting but wonders,what's with Cyan? 14:55, August 27, 2011 (UTC) IOB HEY! I was doing the Inside-Out Boy one! Why did you keep changing that? Everyone knows that IOB will reair on TeenNick's The '90s Are All That block! Does it look like rocks to you!? 22:40, September 14, 2011 (UTC) First of all, I have every right to edit whatever pages I please. Second, there has been no official word that any segment of IOB will air in its entirety. --Jack's Posse Fic 22:43, September 14, 2011 (UTC) There is one, Mr. Sandler sir. Does it look like rocks to you!? 22:53, September 14, 2011 (UTC) WTF? You make no sense! How does that properly respond to what I said?--Jack's Posse Fic 22:54, September 14, 2011 (UTC) The man at Youtube says "Inside Out Boy will return on The 90's are All﻿ That." Does it look like rocks to you!? 23:10, September 14, 2011 (UTC) What man? The official facebook page says nothing about IOB, and that is run by the people who actually work for the network. Please use only official sources for our statements--Jack's Posse Fic 23:11, September 14, 2011 (UTC) The Facebook page has one about IOB. It's TRUE that he's on The 90's Are All That! I'll prove it to you! See what I mean? Does it look like rocks to you!? 23:22, September 14, 2011 (UTC) Really? You've only shown me YouTube. The footage could be edited. Link me to any facebook comments made by The '90s Are All That about the block airing full segments of IOB--Jack's Posse Fic 23:24, September 14, 2011 (UTC) Click here. Jeffrey Lamberson does not work for Nickelodeon. Nor is that from the actual people running the page. You have no official statements--Jack's Posse Fic 11:07, September 15, 2011 (UTC) IT'S TRUE!!!!!! INSIDE OUT BOY IS ON TEENICK! IT'S TRUE!!!!!!!!!!!!! But HOW is it true? You have shown no evidence--Jack's Posse Fic 20:41, September 15, 2011 (UTC) IBECAUSE ALL PEAOPLE SAID IT'S BRINGING BACK IOB!!! AL PEOPLE SAID IT! Does it look like rocks to you!? 15:34, September 17, 2011 (UTC) Not any official people. Just because fans say it doesn't make it true--Jack's Posse Fic 15:35, September 17, 2011 (UTC) I don't care what you said. Just watch TeenNick at midnight through 4:30 AM and see if you can spot the IOB segment!Does it look like rocks to you!? 16:52, September 17, 2011 (UTC) Except they aren't the full segment. It was mashed in with everything else '90s Nick. No full segment has reaired. I'm only listening to official sources, not fans who WANT it to come back. IOB has not returned. Only Stick Stickly has.--Jack's Posse Fic 16:57, September 17, 2011 (UTC) I guess you are right. Does it look like rocks to you!? 19:25, September 17, 2011 (UTC) Photo on Rob Paulson page. I took the photo of Rob on this page: http://nickelodeon.wikia.com/wiki/Rob_Paulsen so I uploaded another one myself. Would have appreciatted a credit. The original photo can be found here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuhnster/5976850517 Except that we are allowed to take from Wikipedia, not flickr--Jack's Posse Fic 13:49, September 17, 2011 (UTC) Actual differences of opinion Hi Jack's Posse Fic. JeremyCreek left a message on my talk page complaining about you undoing his edits. Would you both please discuss the changes before reverting each other's edits on the articles in question the next time? His changes on the infobox syntax were correct, as far as I can see. Why did you revert them at all? More of your edits were reverted by RRabbit42 today. I think this is mainly about removing infoboxes and other content. I must agree that in some cases it's unclear why you removed the content. See Peck|diff=prev&oldid=42258}} this edit for example. It's very important that you state a reason when you remove large sections of an article. And please don't blank an article when you add a "delete" template, I think I mentioned this earlier. First it makes it harder to verify the deletion request, because an admin has to check the article's history. Second other users may disagree and revert your edit, as it happened on Arnold!|curid=41&diff=43138&oldid=43096}} Hey Arnold!. Probably it's more helpful to add Template:Cleanup to a poorly written articles than Template:Delete. Regards, --Weas-El ✉ 07:28, September 22, 2011 (UTC) edit war Your recent editing is not OK. Hi, Phineas.Whatcha doooooooin'? 23:06, September 22, 2011 (UTC) But how is it "not OK"? I cleaned up the articles, linking them properly and taking out heavily opinionated sections. This is a Nickelodeon wiki. Why do we need everything else about an actor's career?--Jack's Posse Fic 23:08, September 22, 2011 (UTC) :Whetever. Hi, Phineas.Whatcha doooooooin'? 23:17, September 22, 2011 (UTC) ::Please stop reverting my edits. You are only hurting this wiki. I am helping this wiki. You are the vandal, not I--Jack's Posse Fic 23:18, September 22, 2011 (UTC) READ YOUR TALKPAGE There is a message I left for you before you blocked me for no reason. I was trying to stop IALL from vandalizing--Jack's Posse Fic 23:24, September 22, 2011 (UTC) Temporary block Reverting of other users' edits repeatedly is vandalism. I think you both may need a day off to quiet the mind. You still may edit your talk pages. Please try to discuss differences of opinion instead of starting an edit war. --Weas-El ✉ 23:31, September 22, 2011 (UTC) :Weas-El, you have to read the history of your talkpage. She was overwriting my warning to you about her so that she could look innocent. She's the vandal. I was trying to revert her vandalism. In no edit summary did she explain why she re-added bad information. She just claimed it was vandalism just because of her previous experience. Please listen to me--Jack's Posse Fic 23:35, September 22, 2011 (UTC) ::I checked the page's history after you mentioned that the first time and I left a message on the user's talk page... unfortunately it was removed shortly after. Sorry, it's nearly 2am here, I had a long day and I'm absolutely not in the mood to discuss this now. I'll check the edits of both of you tomorrow. --Weas-El ✉ 23:45, September 22, 2011 (UTC) ::It is urgent you unblock me ASAP. We must reverse IALL's damage--Jack's Posse Fic 00:23, September 23, 2011 (UTC) Actual dispute I took a closer look at the edits in question. It seems like all involved users consider their contributions productive and for the wiki's benefit, that makes the matter quite tricky. Jack's Posse Fic, you remove everything from the articles (or request its deletion) that you think is irrelevant and/or poorly written. Other users like Isabella and Lego Liker, JeremyCreek, or RRabbit42 obviously have other ideas of what's relevant, worth keeping, or how a good article looks. I agree with Rrabbit42, that improving is better than deleting in most cases. On the other hand I love the KISS principle (Keep It Simple, Stupid!) ;-) However, I think that a good deal of the content you removed didn't need be removed. But my opinion is just my opinion, not a binding policy. An admin is only a trusted user with some extra buttons, not the one who makes the decisions... that's the community. That's why I have to ask all relevant users again: * Always assume good faith! * If somebody makes an edit that you don't agree with, or reverts your edit, leave him a message and discuss it! Repeated reverting will always cause a fight and edit war and never lead to a good end. Try to find a compromise or let the majority decide. I will not block anybody for having a different opinion, even if he removes content from articles, provided that he gives a good reason ("unneeded" isn't a good reason!) But annoying behavior, edit warring, and refusal to discuss dissension, to listen to arguments, or to accept a majority decision are valid reasons for blocking. Remember, this goes to all users, not only to Jack's Posse Fic. Regards, --Weas-El ✉ 14:31, September 23, 2011 (UTC) :No, the actor information I removed is in regards to information about the actor that is irrelevant to Nickelodeon. There was also a lot of nformation that was opinionated, and information on articles that were more appropriate for their own article. I do not see why Amanda gets special treatment to a gallery. This is something RRabbit42 did not explain in his reversion--Jack's Posse Fic 18:58, September 23, 2011 (UTC) :: I don't think this is a case of Amanda receiving special treatment. It's more likely that nobody got around to making galleries for other actors. If that's the case, this would be a great opportunity for you (and anybody else) to create galleries for the other Nickelodeon actors. :: Regarding the actor information, we probably wouldn't have to have as much information as Wikipedia or the IMDb, but by including more than just their Nick-related work, we can help generate interest in the actor's career. If a person likes what the actor does on Nick and sees they were in some movies or a TV show on a different network or released an album, they probably will want to check it out, and could end up renting or buying a DVD, or get the actor's music CD. :: By saying "only have Nick-specific info" on their page (or whatever the exact intent is, since I can't check it right now), that means that people will have to go elsewhere if they want to see what else the actor has been involved in. Some might not want to make that extra effort. If it's here, it's easier for them. :: Again, what's included here doesn't have to be a comprehensive list of their career, but it can be more than just their Nickelodeon work. -RRabbit42 (leave a message) 20:46, September 23, 2011 (UTC) Galleries are unnecessary. Do you realize how many hundreds of actors would have to have galleries? Those pictures in the gallery are completely unnecessary. People think that the more information there is, the better the article, no matter how relevant. This is not Wikipedia. This is Nickelodeon Wiki. If everything is already included in text on the page, why have filmography infoboxes for such a narrow portion of their career? What you are trying to create is clutter and fluff for their articles. Nit beef. We are trying to KISS these articles, not MIACAFAP (Make It is Complicated and Fluffy As Possible). Non-Nickelodeon information should only be in the intro paragraph, especially for people like Takei, Borgnine, and other veteran actors--Jack's Posse Fic 21:49, September 23, 2011 (UTC) : Let me see if I can address each of these points. :* Galleries are unnecessary. Do you realize how many hundreds of actors would have to have galleries? Nowhere is it said that an actor must have a gallery. If they have one, as long as it is kept to just a couple of pictures, it takes up only a small amount of space on the page and helps the reader get to know a little more about the actor. :* People think that the more information there is, the better the article, no matter how relevant. This is not Wikipedia. Correct, this is not Wikipedia, which is why I said "we probably wouldn't have to have as much information as Wikipedia or the IMDb". But there can be more than just their Nickelodeon work, which shows the actor is more versatile than just doing a certain type of show. :* If everything is already included in text on the page, why have filmography infoboxes for such a narrow portion of their career? Infoboxes serve as an introduction for the page. More detailed information is provided on the page itself. :* What you are trying to create is clutter and fluff for their articles. There is a difference between fluff edits and providing information that helps the reader get to know more about the actor. : By trying to purge non-Nickelodeon information, you are limiting what a person can learn about an actor, which requires them to go to other sites in order to get that information they're looking for. Removing non-Nickelodeon information is one extreme. Adding so much information this becomes Wikipedia is the other extreme. There is a middle ground where fluff is removed but the actor is not pigeonholed into people thinking they are Nickelodeon-only actor. --RRabbit42 (leave a message) 01:05, September 24, 2011 (UTC) None of your rebuttals make any sense, especially your penultimate "rebuttal". You are allowing word-for-word plagiarism, which is prevented by limiting it to Nickelodeon projects. You were allowing opinionated statements to be an encyclopedia, which does not belong. Common sense says the actors most likely did more than Nickelodeon work. The non-Nickelodeon roles an actor is most famous for will be found in the introduction. Weas-El approved my cleanup of the articles. This is NICKipedia, not WIKipedia. Please do not question common sense--Jack's Posse Fic 01:49, September 24, 2011 (UTC) Removing content from pages Hi Jack's Posse Fic. We were talking about removing content from pages, do you remember? Please see diff=next&oldid=44257}} this edit of yours. I asked you several times please not to remove content from pages when requesting a page's deletion... Furthermore "restart it, please" is not a valid reason for deletion. There is (was) information on that page, marked with a "stub" template. How does it help the wiki to delete that page? Please try to convince me.--Weas-El ✉ 22:29, September 27, 2011 (UTC) :It was plagiarized information directly from Wikipedia but with bad grammar mixed in. The creator subsequently abandoned it. I currently am focusing on actor articles, so please, follow your own rules and delete Gibby's page--Jack's Posse Fic 23:00, September 27, 2011 (UTC) :Look, I would delete that page instantaneously, if you gave me a good reason. (I really hope my English is better than I think it is... ^^) You didn't mention plagiarism in your deletion request... can you prove that? :I really love to establish rules and to stand to them... I said something about minimum standards earlier, are you referring to that? In my opinion the article is really poor, but still meets the minimum requirements. And I think the inhibition threshold for improving stub articles is lower than that for creating new articles. --Weas-El ✉ 23:34, September 27, 2011 (UTC) Those aren't minimum standards. That's a one-liner that makes this cleanup drive look weak. Please check the candidates for deletion and go through them once a day please--Jack's Posse Fic 23:44, September 27, 2011 (UTC) :I check the candidates for deletion regularly, but I delete pages only if I think that their deletion is justifiable. To start a discussion or overvote me if necessary is the requester's job, not mine. :To tell the truth I'm spending much more time in this wiki than I can actually afford. The only reason I accepted the offered admin privileges is because they helped me to fight spam and vandalism. I'm busy with writing my diploma thesis, I cannot spend more time here than I actually do, even if I wanted to. --Weas-El ✉ 00:15, September 28, 2011 (UTC) I explained how each deletion is justified. There are not enough people to oppose each deletion, and thus deletion wins.--Jack's Posse Fic 21:53, September 28, 2011 (UTC)